To Tooele Army Ordnance Depot Co Continuous Imp Improvemen - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
to tooele army ordnance depot co continuous imp
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

To Tooele Army Ordnance Depot Co Continuous Imp Improvemen - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 08, 2024 326 likes •796 views

1 To Tooele Army Ordnance Depot Co Continuous Imp Improvemen ement of of a a Gr Grou oundwater er Mod odel el for or Re Remedy and Decision Making over a 25 Y 25 Year Pe Period Peter Andersen, P.E. Tetra Tech Inc. Jon P

slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

To Tooele Army Ordnance Depot – Co Continuous Imp Improvemen ement of

  • f a

a Gr Grou

  • undwater

er Mod

  • del

el for

  • r

Re Remedy and Decision Making over a 25 Y 25 Year Pe Period

Jon P Fenske, P.E. USACE-IWR-Hydrologic Engineering Center Davis CA Peter Andersen, P.E. Tetra Tech Inc. Alpharetta GA James Ross, PhD, P.E. HydroGeoLogic Inc. Hudson OH

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Tooele Valley, Utah

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Map of Industrial Area and Source Locations

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Tooele Army Depot

  • Groundwater contamination since beginning of depot activities
  • 1942- WWII servicing of military vehicles
  • Primarily TCE
  • Multiple source areas (ditches, lagoons, sumps, landfill)
  • 4 mile long plume(s) extends offsite
  • Remedial activities include:
  • Excavation and capping
  • 5400 gpm pump and treat (1994-2004)
  • Largest in Department of Defense
  • Air stripping
  • Source treatment
  • MNA
  • Regulatory requirements
  • Monitoring and continued characterization
  • Annual updates to flow and transport model
slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Tooele Groundwater Flow and Transport Model

  • Unique Case:
  • Groundwater Model Updated Annually over 25 Year Period
  • Consistent Modeling Team for Entire Period
  • Applications:
  • Definition of Sensitive Parameters/Data Gathering
  • Conceptual Model Development
  • Support for Shut-Down of Pump and Treat System
  • Implementation of Monitored Natural Attenuation
  • Supporting Evidence for Abiotic Degradation
  • Probabilistic Analysis of Plume Migration Reaching Action Boundaries
slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Most Significant Model Changes

  • 1993 Completion of initial flow model by HEC
  • Evaluation of plume containment by Pump & Treat system
  • 1997-2003 Annual Recalibrations
  • Model extent expanded to SW, NE; vertical resolution increased
  • 2004 Flow and Transport Model
  • Model extent expanded NE,SE
  • Multiple calibration targets (heads, drawdown, plume migration, etc)
  • Steady state flow, transient transport
  • 2007 Transient calibration of water levels from 1942 to present
  • 2008 Analysis of uncertainty in model predictions
  • 2010 Calibration using parameter estimation (PEST)
  • 2016 Evaluation using Ensemble Kalman Filtering (EnKF)
  • 2018 Initial implementation of abiotic degradation
slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Dimensional Changes Versus Time (log scale)

  • TOTAL # of cells

# of cells per layer thickness (ft) cell spacing (ft) domain (mi2) # of layers

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Source Flux By Area: 2003, 2008, 2013 Models

2003 2008 2013

  • WWII to Vietnam
  • Remediation 1988 – present
  • Bldg 615 identified as bigger

source in 2013 than previously thought

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Uses of Model

  • Definition of Sensitive Parameters/Data Gathering
  • Conce

ceptual Model Development

  • Mountain F

Front R Recharge t to G GW

  • Location o
  • f l

low K K C Confining B Bed

  • Support for Test Shut-Down (and Permanent

Shutdown) of Pump and Treat System

  • Implementation of Monitored Natural Attenuation
  • Supporting Evidence

ce for Abiotic c Degradation

  • Pl

Planning Lead Ti Time me for Potenti tial Re Remediation

  • Probabilistic A

Analysis o

  • f P

Plume M Migration Reaching A Action B Boundaries

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

  • Based on large snowfall, snowmelt event that occurred between

March 26 and April 4, 2016

Conceptual Model Development - Mountain Front Recharge

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17 April 6, 2016 March 28, 2016 2 ft

D well measurements 3/25/15 to 11/15/16

Upgradient wells near mountain front

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

Downgradient wells further away from mountain front (downgradient of fault)

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

1.5 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.0

* Early April water levels “spike” (ft)

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

Note fast GW response to Spring rainfall event in alluvial catchments

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

  • SE wells closer to mountain fronts had greatest early April

response in water levels.

  • Thus, snowmelt and subsequent increased GW recharge

from canyons, streams has direct, larger, and faster than expected influence on water elevations than previously anticipated.

  • This is contrary to the previous conceptualization that

subsurface recharge to model domain from mountain fronts took months/years

22

Conclusion

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

Integration of Conceptualization into Numerical Model CH4 CH3 CH1 CH2 CH2 Model Domain The MODFLOW CHD Package adjusted to interpolate greater GW inflows in SP6 – Fall/Winter 2016

Mountain Front Recharge

Final Initial

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

Increased CH2

FY17 Transient Model Calibration – increasing subsurface inflow from canyons resulted in improved calibration

Initial

Mountain Front Recharge

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

Confining Bed – low K lacustrine deposits

Hydrogeologic approach based on water levels, response to agricultural pumping

Conceptual Model Development – Confining Bed

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Confining Bed Conceptualization

Burk, et al. (2005) of the Utah Geologic Survey performed a study to delineate areas of recharge and discharge to springs and wetlands in the Tooele Valley. Water balance survey. The study also delineated location of a fine grained confining bed resulting from lake recession.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

A conclusion of their analysis was the existence of a sloping confining layer near the same location as in the Tooele groundwater flow model. Studies were completely independent of each other and based on different approaches/data.

Confining Bed Conceptualization

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

Confining Bed Conceptualization

Burk et al., (2005)

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

Confining Bed Conceptualization

Burk et al., (2005)

slide-30
SLIDE 30

30

Confining Bed Conceptualization

slide-31
SLIDE 31

31

Modeled TCE Plume in 1986

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

slide-32
SLIDE 32

32

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

Modeled TCE Plume in 1997

slide-33
SLIDE 33

33

Modeled TCE Plume in 2009

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

slide-34
SLIDE 34

34

Kriged Measured Plume (late 2017) Modeled Plume (late 2017)

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

slide-35
SLIDE 35

35

note: accurate match with flow gradient resulted in over simulation of transport

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

slide-36
SLIDE 36

36

  • Over-simulation of historical and future plume movement at

the plume edge suggests that the model is not accounting for physical and/or chemical processes

  • Separate sensitivity analysis indicated that simulated TCE

degradation could improve the model match to observed plume migration

  • These results support the presence of degradation in some

areas of the aquifer

  • Simulation of this process has potential to improve the

calibration of the model and provide grounded predictions more consistent with recently observed trends in concentration

  • Supports need for investigation of physical field evidence

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

slide-37
SLIDE 37

37

EPA (2009) Savannah River National Laboratory (2018)

Sediment sample from Tooele Army Depot

Supporting Physical Evidence for Degradation

slide-38
SLIDE 38

38

  • Magnetic susceptibility in core

samples at TEAD-N suggest abiotic degradation of TCE

  • First line of evidence for TCE

degradation

  • Measurements of magnetic

susceptibility provide broad ranges

  • f degradation
  • Defined to be spatially variable via

hydrogeologic zonation

Supporting Physical Evidence for Degradation

John Wilson (2018)

slide-39
SLIDE 39

39

Supporting Evidence for Degradation

Modeled 2017 plume w/o degradation Updated modeled 2017 plume with degradation at extent of plume boundaries

slide-40
SLIDE 40

40

Planning Lead Time for Potential Remediation

  • How long are TCE concentrations likely to remain below 5 µg/L along

the GWMA or 1-mile buffer boundary?

  • Initialize predictive plume to reflect both modeled and observed TCE

concentrations

  • Minimize uncertainty related to initial conditions
  • Employ Monte Carlo analysis
  • Inject stochasticity into calibrated model parameters
  • Mean: Calibrated value
  • 95% confidence interval: ± 20% of mean
  • Randomly sample values from stochastic model parameters (frequency based on

probability)

  • Models created by parameter sampling should all represent plausible versions of reality
  • Results should still reflect intended uncertainty while still maintaining relatively high

calibration quality

slide-41
SLIDE 41

41

5-Year Prediction

  • Approx. 1900 ft
  • Approx. 1600 ft

Planning Lead Time for Potential Remediation

Aggregate starting plume combining Kriged and Modeled TCE plumes

slide-42
SLIDE 42

42

1-Mile Buffer Boundary

Planning Lead Time for Potential Remediation

  • High likelihood of TCE concentrations

remaining below MCL along

  • 1-mile boundary within 6 years

(100% likelihood)

  • 1-mile boundary within 12 years

(82% likelihood)

slide-43
SLIDE 43

43

  • The Tooele model has been continuously developed and

refined on an annual basis over a 25 year period.

  • The groundwater flow and transport modeling team has

been largely consistent throughout the past 25 years.

  • This has allowed for:
  • Multiple field investigations based on model findings
  • The increased complexity and expanse of the model as data

warrants

  • Validation of the model based on studies independent from the

modeling effort

  • Developing supporting evidence for abiotic degradation
  • Planning lead time for potential remediation in the future

Conclusions

slide-44
SLIDE 44

44

To Tooele Army Ordnance Depot – Co Continuous Imp Improvemen ement of

  • f a

a Gr Grou

  • undwater

er Mod

  • del

el for

  • r

Re Remedy and Decision Making over a 25 Y 25 Year Pe Period

Jon P Fenske, P.E. USACE-IWR-Hydrologic Engineering Center Davis CA Peter Andersen, P.E. Tetra Tech Inc. Alpharetta GA James Ross, PhD, P.E. HydroGeoLogic Inc. Hudson OH

slide-45
SLIDE 45

45

Questions/Comments?